Will it follow the principles of Common Worship of the C of E?
Will the forthcoming ECUSA "Prayer Book" [= a collection of Rites in several books and also at a Web Site for downloading] be similar to the Common Worship (2000) of the Church of England?
If we compare The Alternative Service Book (published 1980, retired 2000) with Common Worship (2000) of the C of E we can see that in certain important ways the most recent additional Prayer Book (that, importantly, exists alongside The Book of Common Prayer [1662] and does not replace it) is more conservative than its predecessor.
The ASB came out in 1980 after years of experiments. It was (in retrospect) a conservative book in that it was not obviously affected by the feminist agenda in terms of using inclusive language. It was, on the other hand, revolutionary in that it was the first official C of E prayer book that was primarily in "contemporary language."
In contrast, the American 1979 Prayer Book, which also was dominated by contemporary language, incorporated inclusive language in the Psalter and in some Canticles and rubrics.
Although most of the ASB of 1980 was in "contemporary language" provision was made for a "traditional language" Rite of Holy Communion. However, this English Book, as it did not replace the BCP (1662) but existed alongside it, did not need to provide services that were already in the BCP. Thus the "traditional language" service (Rite B) is of a different "shape" to that of "The Order for Holy Communion" in the BCP. It follows the "shape" of Rite A (contemporary language services) and thus of Gregory Dix ("The Shape of the Liturgy").
With the CW there is an apparent intention to make its provisions so wide that the need to use the BCP (1662) becomes virtually non-existent in the parishes. It provides Morning and Evening Prayer in contemporary language alongside Morning and Evening Prayer from the BCP. For the Eucharist it has two types of service, Order One (the new shape) first in contemporary and then in traditional language and Order Two (the BCP shape) first from the BCP (with only minor amendments) and then in contemporary language.
What the CW does not have is provision of the old Lectionary for Daily Services [1662, revised 1871 & 1922] and the Eucharistic Lectionary of the BCP for use with the BCP shape services. It is assumed that the Collects of the CW and the Common Lectionary will be used at all times for all the services of the CW.
Further, the CW provides a Psalter which has gone over to inclusive language (e.g., Psalm 1 begins, " Blessed are they who have not walked." instead of "Blessed is the man"). This makes the praying of the Psalter in with and through Jesus Christ very difficult for he is the Man of Psalm 1 and he has disappeared here and elsewhere!
So in terms of the provision of services of worship in the traditional language and idiom of English public prayer and worship (saying "Thou, Thee," to God and "you" to man) the CW of 2000 is more conservative than the ASB of 1980. Yet in that it has included within the contemporary language sections the principle of inclusivity ("making women visible" as it has been called) it has made it nearly impossible to create stability in this "contemporary language." While the traditional language of the BCP sections of CW will remain stable ( as it has done for centuries) this will not be so of the contemporary language sections. There will be pressure upon the C of E to modify these in order to suit this or that pressure group of today and tomorrow, and thus the Book will quickly go out of date. Contemporary language for liturgy is still in a state of flux and development and there is no sign that it has reached a resting point.
And this problem of creating or finding a stable form of contemporary language for worship is a massive one facing the ECUSA Liturgical Commission. For this group is under pressure from so many pressure groups to have services to meet their needs and to speak in their language. This is why it is said that the Prayer Book now being created will in fact be a series of provisions at web-sites and in loose-leaf books that can be utilised for local needs.
In this situation of great fluidity and experimentation in the ECUSA liturgical scene, there is now a wonderful opportunity for the ECUSA to do at the G C of 2006 what it failed to do in the GC of 1976 & 1979. That is to make the Services of the 1928 BCP to be the primary traditional language provisions for the future ECUSA wide and comprehensive "prayer book."
Why not?
The Rev'd Dr. Peter Toon
Minister of Christ Church, Biddulph Moor,
England & Vice-President and Emissary-at-Large
of The Prayer Book Society of America
No comments:
Post a Comment